420 
ANALYSIS OF CHINCHONA BABK. 
Mem.—As I could only submit to examination 165 grains of the bark, the above re¬ 
sult must be taken with reserve. 
No. 4 gave of crystallized sulphate.2‘43 
of alkaloid soluble in ether.2‘03 
of alkaloid insoluble in ether. (Chinchonine).0 - 60 
Mem.—This specimen gave a product not refining quite so well as No. 1. 
No. 5 gave of crystallized sulphate.0*70 
of alkaloid soluble in ether.0T0 
of alkaloid soluble in ether, but crystallized by evaporation .... 0 - 26 
of alkaloids insoluble in ether. (Chinchonine). a trace. 
Mem.—This sulphate did not stand the ether test. 
No. 6 gave of crystallized sulphate.0‘90 
of alkaloid soluble in ether.0*60 
of alkaloid insoluble in ether. (Chinchonine).a trace. 
Mem.—The tests showed Quinine and Chinchonidine. 
No. 7 gave of crystallized sulphate.5‘82 
of alkaloid soluble in ether. (Aricine).0‘29 
of alkaloid insoluble in ether. (Chinchonine).0‘39 
Mem.—This sulphate is that of commercial Quinidine, and contains probably no 
quinine. 
No. 8 gave of crystallized sulphate.1‘2G 
of alkaloid soluble in ether.0‘60 
of alkaloid insoluble in ether. (Chinchonine). a trace. 
Mem.—The product similar to that of No. 7. 
I beg to direct special attention to the remark, that the fine white crystallized Sul¬ 
phate of Quinine (apparently) made from the bark of C. succirubra will not stand the 
test which is employed to distinguish the pure article in commerce. The cause of this 
I stated in my first report, viz. that “the crystallizations obtained are mixed with some 
sulphate of chinchonidine, which is commercially (but not medicinally) a disadvantage, 
and one which always attends the products of red bark.” It is, of course, possible to 
separate the chinchonidine, but then this must very seriously diminish the percentage of 
six per cent. I obtained from this gross product little more than four per cent, refined 
in the first instance (though more subsequently), and of this I ascertained about ten per 
cent, as chinchonidine. This difficulty must be looked steadily in the face, and I would 
suggest that it may be obviated, either by a change being wrought in the opinion of the 
medical world as to the value of chinchonidine as a medicine, or by the plant being en¬ 
couraged to produce quinine instead of chinchonidine. 
The first might be, very probably, the result of a commission of inquiry composed of 
competent medical practitioners. I may mention that the late Dr. Royle entered 
zealously, at my suggestion, into the question, and satisfied himself by experiment 
as to the value of chinchonidine, but I am not aware that he left any written record 
of the result he attained. My own experiments confirm this view of the question, and I 
have shown* that this alkaloid (which must not be confounded with chinchonine) must 
have constituted (in whole or in part) the therapeutic agent in the cure of the Countess 
of Chinchon, as also that it was the alkaloid successfully employed at Philadelphia. 
The second alternative may seem visionary at first sight, but when we consider the re¬ 
sults at which Mr. MTvor has arrived, and, further, the circumstances under which 
chinchonidine is produced, this view of the case may be altered. 
In No. 7, we have an illustration of what careful cultivation will do, as the plant C. 
micrantha, which (with its congeners the grey barks) produces largely and chiefly chin¬ 
chonine in its native climate of Huanuco,f now produces a very small portion of chin¬ 
chonine, and a large quantity of the allied alkaloid quinidine. This is, then, a hopeful 
change, if time should confirm the observation. 
Then chinchonidine seems almost always to accompany quinine in greater or less 
abundance. It does so in the Calisaya of Bolivia, in the lancifolia barks of New Gra- 
* “Illustration of ‘Nueva Quinologia/ sub voce Cliahuarguera.” 
t A peculiar climate, of which I have recorded Mr. Pritchett’s description under head 
C. micrantha. 
